Star Trek - especially a reboot - is a hard sell. It isn't ever going to be The Godfather, so film snobs (I actually love film snobs) will hate it. And loyalist fans will probably hate it for not being the original. That leaves very little wiggle room.

I enjoyed the originals and I enjoyed the first reboot movie. I think it's because I don't expect Schindler's list when I go see a Star Trek movie and I don't feel married to the originals.

FWIW Rotten Tomatoes has it at 86% Fresh with users having at 89%.

That puts it ahead of Iron Man 3, Oblivion, The Great Gatsby, Fast Furious 6 and 42.

Point being, if you're going to the movies, you have a decent shot at enjoying this.

IDK when I was a kid I went into the theater expecting action and adventure and got a couple iconic movies that showed the human condition and made me think a lot about what I would do in a No Win situation or what path is mankind is on re robots (think Terminator type Singularity years before Terminator came out).

I am calming down on the reboots, in another couple of weeks people will have forgotten they even existed. Meanwhile the TV Series and TOS movies will be quoted and found by new generations who might not like the effects in TWOK but love the story more.

Good lord, those hating on this flick see way too many thing wrong in life in general. WTF dudes, this isn't an academy winning drama, like silence of the lambs or Schindler's List. Hahahaha. It's a ****in action movie.

Any there in lies the rub. Star Trek was never meant to be a ****ing action movie series. It was meant to be a sci-fi movie franchise. It was supposed to be something in the mold of The Abyss, or the original Alien, not DieHard in space. It was movie franchise that was meant to grapple with bigger ideas and themes, and while the original 10 didn't always succeed in that endeavor, at least they ****ing tried.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZONA

Try to see it for what it is and then you might be able to enjoy it. If you go in thinking your're going to see A Beautiful Mind or Black Swan, then of course you're not going to like it. ****in grow a set and realize it's an action movie but a damn good one. Nothing like a Transformers or Battle Los Angeles.

Sorry, when playing with the Star Trek franchise, you don't get to play the "Its just a fun summer movie get over your expectations" card This is a franchise that influenced countless thousands of young minds towards the science and engineering fields, it was a franchise that in a very racially backward time dared to put a Black Woman and Asian Man on the bridge. Yes, their metaphors were sometimes clunky and unwieldy, but this was a franchise that was always about expecting more. To see all of that reduced to a pandering action film franchise is the equivalent of Producing a Godfather sequel in the mold of The Fast and the Furious. So yes, I will criticized this poorly conceived, poorly written, and poorly executed pile of excrement.

Any there in lies the rub. Star Trek was never meant to be a ****ing action movie series. It was meant to be a sci-fi movie franchise. It was supposed to be something in the mold of The Abyss, or the original Alien, not DieHard in space. It was movie franchise that was meant to grapple with bigger ideas and themes, and while the original 10 didn't always succeed in that endeavor, at least they ****ing tried.

Sorry, when playing with the Star Trek franchise, you don't get to play the "Its just a fun summer movie get over your expectations" card This is a franchise that influenced countless thousands of young minds towards the science and engineering fields, it was a franchise that in a very racially backward time dared to put a Black Woman and Asian Man on the bridge. Yes, their metaphors were sometimes clunky and unwieldy, but this was a franchise that was always about expecting more. To see all of that reduced to a pandering action film franchise is the equivalent of Producing a Godfather sequel in the mold of The Fast and the Furious. So yes, I will criticized this poorly conceived, poorly written, and poorly executed pile of excrement.

I loved it. I'm not a big Sci-Fi fan at all, I prefer High Fantasy (dork v. nerd, right?), but my wife grew up on Star Trek so I went to see it with her. I thought the first reboot was good, and I thought this one was much better. I really liked this movie. I would classify it more action than Sci-Fi though.

All that being said, I never watched Star Trek on TV nor the original movies, though I did see the one with the whales as a kid. And I remember pretty much that it had whales.

So, for comparison purposes, I have nothing. I just watched this as a detached person looking for some action entertainment, and it passed with flying colors in that regard.

Maybe as the characters get older they will deal with some themes more like what humanity is, the search for knowledge etc etc. Right now Spock Kirk and company are young and brash. Just a different take on it that sort of gives the series room to grow when Abrahms turns it over to a new director to do star wars.

Star Trek the show - essentially a series of self contained morality plays - wouldn't work as a movie, and I actually don't think it would work as a series anymore. People want continuity and progression in their shows now. You can't really have these self-contained episodes where everything wraps up nicely and they move on to the next thing. The last vestiges of this are in crime dramas and maybe you could make a case for hospital dramas. Even those have started to veer away from the compartmentalization of stories in an episode.

And for those whining the movies are too action packed for what Star Trek was, guess what? Most of the movies had action, and all the cerebral movies that dealt with existentialism and morals were the worst.

And for those whining the movies are too action packed for what Star Trek was, guess what? Most of the movies had action, and all the cerebral movies that dealt with existentialism and morals were the worst.

I think you misunderstand my complaint. I'm not complaining about the amount of action in the film. Action sequences are often an important part of any drama. Its typically the tool used to achieve resolution in a conflict. But action was never the point, even in Wrath of Khan, which is arguably one of the more action packed of the first 10 movies. Wrath of Khan was all about facing your own mortality. Hell, it even gets pretty heavy handed with it (as I mentioned, the Treks weren't always deft with their themes) But it is pretty clearly a morality play in which Kirk finally learns that he can't cheat death.

You've mentioned it earlier in this very thread, J.J. Abrams is a great visual story-teller, but hasn't got the first clue how to construct a cohesive narrative that makes any sense. Every plot point in the film is a poorly conceived attempt to stage the next action sequence. I remember reading that when Naughty Dog was creating Uncharted 3, they created the big action set pieces first, and then tried to find a way to stitch them together into a single narrative. It really feels like that is Abrams approach to story-telling as well, and it just doesn't work for me.

I think you misunderstand my complaint. I'm not complaining about the amount of action in the film. Action sequences are often an important part of any drama. Its typically the tool used to achieve resolution in a conflict. But action was never the point, even in Wrath of Khan, which is arguably one of the more action packed of the first 10 movies. Wrath of Khan was all about facing your own mortality. Hell, it even gets pretty heavy handed with it (as I mentioned, the Treks weren't always deft with their themes) But it is pretty clearly a morality play in which Kirk finally learns that he can't cheat death.

You've mentioned it earlier in this very thread, J.J. Abrams is a great visual story-teller, but hasn't got the first clue how to construct a cohesive narrative that makes any sense. Every plot point in the film is a poorly conceived attempt to stage the next action sequence. I remember reading that when Naughty Dog was creating Uncharted 3, they created the big action set pieces first, and then tried to find a way to stitch them together into a single narrative. It really feels like that is Abrams approach to story-telling as well, and it just doesn't work for me.

I am totally convinced that's what he does. I think he can think visually and his approach to sequences is dynamic and innovative. But yes, as a story writer he isn't very good and you can see him frame things around these beautiful scenes he wants to show with often clumsy results.

That said, I like some of his movies. Probably because I think some things can get messed up if you try to bog them down with too much moral rhetoric or overly-clever plot points. I haven't seen Into Darkness, yet, and I may hate it, but one thing I've learned as a fan of the franchise since I was five is that Star Trek is it's best when it doesn't take itself too seriously. Abrahms breathed life into a dead franchise, and as imperfect as it has been (and sometimes outright ludicrous) he brought it back with, if arguably not more popularity, certainly more appeal than when it whithered on the vine. For that I will excuse some of these things if I get to enjoy new Star Trek movies again. For me, Star Trek is beloved, but it isn't sacrosanct.

Star Trek the show - essentially a series of self contained morality plays - wouldn't work as a movie, and I actually don't think it would work as a series anymore. People want continuity and progression in their shows now. You can't really have these self-contained episodes where everything wraps up nicely and they move on to the next thing. The last vestiges of this are in crime dramas and maybe you could make a case for hospital dramas. Even those have started to veer away from the compartmentalization of stories in an episode.

And for those whining the movies are too action packed for what Star Trek was, guess what? Most of the movies had action, and all the cerebral movies that dealt with existentialism and morals were the worst.

Star Trek the show - essentially a series of self contained morality plays - wouldn't work as a movie, and I actually don't think it would work as a series anymore. People want continuity and progression in their shows now. You can't really have these self-contained episodes where everything wraps up nicely and they move on to the next thing. The last vestiges of this are in crime dramas and maybe you could make a case for hospital dramas. Even those have started to veer away from the compartmentalization of stories in an episode.

And for those whining the movies are too action packed for what Star Trek was, guess what? Most of the movies had action, and all the cerebral movies that dealt with existentialism and morals were the worst.

The TNG movies I don't remember but I only saw them once or twice. I liked the last one the best.

1) TWOK
2) TMP DIRECTORS CUT!!!
3) Voyage Home
4) the last TNG movie
5) ST III
6) Undiscovered Country
Everything after doesn't really matter. A year or 2 ago I would have swapped VI and III but III actually holds up better than VI.

I love VI. Christopher Plummer is awesome. And Kim Catrall is a suprisingly good Vulcan. The battles are good. Everyone gets a moment of being awesome and funny, and Christian Slater even makes a cameo.

I love VI. Christopher Plummer is awesome. And Kim Catrall is a suprisingly good Vulcan. The battles are good. Everyone gets a moment of being awesome and funny, and Christian Slater even makes a cameo.

Yea but I rewatched all but V 2 years ago and I thought VI didn't hold up as well and III surprised me more with age.

What you posted above is why I liked it when I first saw it. Maybe it was the cluncky end where they *** Spoiler Alert *** foil the assignation plot that I didn't like it. There were small things too that should been caught in post production.

I hated III for the longest time mostly because they destroyed the Enterprise and the replacement Saavik but it was better shot and had some good action plus it was a very good setup to the next movie.

Yea but I rewatraumatic the but V 2 years ago and I thought VI didn't hold up as well and III surprised me more with age.

What you posted above is why I liked it when I first saw it. Maybe it was the cluncky end where they *** Spoiler Alert *** foil the assignation plot that I didn't like it. There were small things too that should been caught in post production.

I hated III for the longest time mostly because they destroyed the Enterprise and the replacement Saavik but it was better shot and had some good action plus it was a very good setup to the next movie.

Yeah the destruction of the ship was very traumatic the first time I saw it.

At the time a lot of people thought Leonard Nimoy was just trying to kill the series, and his involvement in it, off forever. He had to be begged to do the movies and only agreed to the second if he could die at the end. It took letting him direct to get the third one going. Then he blows up the enterprise and people thought he was just acting out again.

At the time a lot of people thought Leonard Nimoy was just trying to kill the series, and his involvement in it, off forever. He had to be begged to do the movies and only agreed to the second if he could die at the end. It took letting him direct to get the third one going. Then he blows up the enterprise and people thought he was just acting out again.

I thought it was more written to kill off Spock, and if they couldn't sign him back for a couple more movies then just keep him dead. I just watched this with my 10 year old daughter for her 1st time to see TWOK and you could tell all the forshadowing, the Admiral on the ship meeting in the torpedo tubes, the use of great lit to forshadow death, needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one...the whole no win scenario theme that ran through the major characters, finally the last of the Tale of 2 Cities, I have been and all ways will be your friend. even thought the 1st and last chapters are perfect for the movie the rest of Dickens book doesn't have any other great quotes to steal.

Lucky for us they made the Spock III act believe able and slowly got Spock back to where he could play a couple roles in III and IV which were funny and touching.

Now I have to get ST III for my daughter to watch so she can see how they were able to bring him back to life and cheat the Kobishi Maur again.